March 3, 2011 - 5:43pm
'U' opposed to state Senate's passage of bills containing new restrictions for stem cell research
BY NICOLE ABER AND BETHANY BIRON
The Michigan Senate passed a package of bills Wednesday that would place restrictions on stem cell research in the state — something University officials have stated they are against.
In a statement released Wednesday, Cynthia Wilbanks, the University’s Vice President for Government Relations, wrote that the University is “deeply disappointed” that the state Senate passed the bills and that they will have adverse effects on the stem cell research conducted by University researchers.
“The proposed regulations would undermine the expressed will of Michigan voters and would discourage our scientists from pursuing research that promises to improve the treatment of deadly diseases,” Wilbanks wrote.
The set of bills seeks to change the definition of the type of embryos that can be used in stem cell research, require researchers to report more patient information to the state, and implement harsher penalties for those who don’t follow the new laws, if passed.
According to University officials, the legislation could potentially put a halt to numerous research projects currently being conducted at the University.
In an interview with The Michigan Daily Wednesday afternoon, Wilbanks said strict guidelines have already been set to regulate research in this area and said she feels it is crucial to continue this research in order to help cure debilitating illnesses.
“There are a number of stem cell research projects underway at the University of Michigan,” Wilbanks said. “Many of them use adult stem cells; a number of them are using embryonic stem cells. We took one year to establish our practice guidelines and rules to follow (the) Michigan constitutional amendment and are pursuing embryonic stem cell research that we believe will help lead to cure the many deadly diseases.”
The changes in the legislation would amend Michigan’s 2008 ballot initiative that eased the state’s restrictions on embryonic stem cell lines allowable for research.
The press release states that the package of bills violates the 2008 constitutional amendment.
“The amendment prohibited the passage of state laws that ‘prevent, restrict, obstruct or discourage’ stem cell research in the state — which is exactly what this package of bills would do, if enacted," Wilbanks wrote.
In the interview today, Wilbanks further explained the University’s view on the unconstitutionality of the bill and said it prevents the progression of stem cell research both at the University and throughout the state.
“We oppose the entire package and we continue to believe that this unnecessarily burdens, restricts, and creates disincentives for the research to move forward,” Wilbanks said. “There was a discussion in the state Senate today about whether the bills meet the constitutional requirements and we would argue that they do discourage and in some way restrict or inhibit the ability to conduct stem cell research.”
Wilbanks said this is one of the most controversial types of research in states across the country and has faced numerous regulations, but said she thinks the increased parameters are hindering the augmentation of new medical discoveries.
“It is one the most highly regulated types of research in the country,” Wilbanks said. “And this is another layer of regulation that serves no public health or medical purpose.”
State Sen. Tom George, chair of the Senate Health Policy Committee and a sponsor of the bills, told the Daily in February that opponents of the bills don’t understand their actual implications, which wouldn’t include outlawing research on embryos that carry genetic diseases — something opponents of the bills say would come with the proposed change to the definition of the term “not suitable for implantation.”
George told the Daily at the time that the legislation aims to clarify the language in the amendment, which will make Michigan’s stem cell research laws in compliance with those of other states.
“All of the provisions are less stringent than what they have in Massachusetts and California,” George told the Daily at the time. “The penalties that we have for violating the act are in line with the penalties that are used in other states that have similar laws."
State Sen. Liz Brater (D–Ann Arbor) said in an interview today that she voted against the bills, as she’s concerned about the unconstitutionality of the legislation, and said the 2008 amendment already contains necessary restrictions on the research and therefore doesn’t need to be changed.
“I think it was very likely unconstitutional because the proposal specifically states that the research shall be subject to the restrictions stated in the amendment, and it very clearly laid out in the constitution what restrictions are going to apply to this research and that they will also be regulated in federal law,” Brater said. “So I think the legislation is not fully necessary and potentially harmful.”
George also told the Daily in February that the new reporting system that the bills aim to create wouldn’t affect state institutions like public universities, as they are already mandated to submit reports to the federal government regarding the stem cell research taking place there.
However, Wilbanks wrote in the press release that the new reports would only have negative affects on the stem cell research conducted at the University.
“The new reporting requirements included in these bills would do nothing to advance public health and would create a disruptive work environment for those engaged in this research,” Wilbanks wrote.
— Daily Staff Reporter Valiant Lowitz contributed to this report.
